The Migration Policy of EU and its Member States Attitude

(Sweden, Germany, New Member States)

April 27th 2016 ID 70779ID 70777

History of the EU

The European Union dates back to after WWII when the European economic

community was formed. This community consisted of six major powers, Belgium,

Germany, France, Italy, Luxembourg and the Netherlands. To date the European Union

consists of 28 countries, with the latest country to join being Croatia in 20131. The

membership of the European Union is open to "any European State which respects the

values referred to in Article 2 and is committed to promoting them.”2These values are

respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for

human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities"2. This being said,to

officially join the European Union a country needs to meet economic and political

standards called the Copenhagen criteria. Although there aresome strict criteriaboth to

enter and to maintain a member of the European Union, in the recent years we have

seen difficulties throughout the system. With twenty eight countries consisting of

different economic positions, political backgrounds and cultures has caused it to be

difficult for such a multitude of countries to see eye to eye. With the recent migration

crisis throughout Europe taking place it has been difficult for the European Union to

work as one unit because of different, policies and attitudes towards migration.

Specifically, there tends to be the most contrast between Germany and Sweden, where

Germany has continued to stay true to their open boarder policy and Sweden has

completely closed their boarders to refugees. This report will contain a detailed outline

of migration policies and citizen’s/government’s attitudes towards migration, while taking

a close look at the migration crises in relation to these countries.

1 http://europa.eu/about-eu/countries/member-countries/2http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=URISERV%3Al33500

2

History of German Migration

To date Germany is the second most popular migration destination in the world,

next to the United States.3 After World War II, due to changing boarders approximately

12 million refugees of German ethnicity had to migrate from former Germany territory

into post-war German territory.4 In the 1960’s a number of Turkish, Italian, Greek,

Moroccan, Portuguese, Tunisian and Yugoslavians migrated to Germany after bilateral

recruitment agreements were signed to help aid the postwar boom in western

Germany.5 The agreements allowed the migrants to work jobs that required little

qualification but helped Germany gain much needed economic stability. These workers

initially only received the right to reside in Germany but as time proceeded many of

them were able to gain a German citizenship and thus resulted in the acknowledgment

of Germany being a migrant country. The becoming of Germany as amigrant country

came into full effect on January 1st, 2005 when a new immigration law came into effect

where Germany officiallyacknowledged being an immigration country.6

As of 2014 about 16.3 million people with an immigrant background were living in

Germany, with this number increasing every month with Germany’s open boarder

policy.At this time 8.2 million of these immigrants did not have a German citizenship7.

Although over time they were able to obtain a citizenship.

3 http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-05-20/immigration-boom-propels-germany-past-u-k-in-new-oecd-ranking4 http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/spiegelgeschichte/d-76574305.html5 http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/03/08/germans-older-immigrant-communities-dont-like-the-new-kids-in-town-refugees-syrians-iraqis-turks/6 http://www.migrationpolicy.org/programs/data-hub/charts/top-25-destination-countries-global-migrants-over-time7 http://www.fr-online.de/pegida,29337826,29350760.html

3

Germany’s Government and Citizens Attitude

With the ongoing conflict in the Middle East, Europe is currently witnessing one

of the largest immigration crisis it has ever seen.Around 91,000 asylum-seekers arrived

in January of this year, and more than 1.1 million entered the country in 2015. The vast

majority of the refugees being from Syria and Iraq.5 The actions of an open boarder

policy were made by Chancellor Angela Merkel. Her actions toward the situation were

initially supported by the general population as German citizens accepted refugees with

open arms. However, before the end of the year the mood of the general population

began to change.

The German citizens seem to have mixed opinions on the matter, with the recent

rise in their right wing communist parties bashing against the current left wing liberal

party. These groups such as Pegida and the Eurosceptic Alternative fur Deutschland

(AfD) partyare extreme right-wing anti-immigration groups have gained at surprising

amount of support5. Many Germans feel that Chancellor Angela Merkel failed to prepare

for the cultural and economic consequences faced by her open-door refugee policy.

Many people who were supportive of Chancellor Angela Merkel are now reconsidering

her open boarder policy. To put things in perspective, currently40 percent of Germans

with an immigrant background said they believed Berlin should take in fewer refugees,

while nearly a quarter said it was time to stop all refugees from entering entirely5.

Moreover, with the surge of refugees from different ethnic backgrounds entering the

country there has been has been not only riots between German citizens with different

political views but as well riots between the refugees themselves. Many citizens are

expressing their concerns of the boarder policy due to the recent assaults that have

4

been carried out on German citizens by refugees. With all the political instability this has

given the extreme right wing parties, leverage over the German citizens.

The Chancellor has now put herself in a very difficult situation. If she leaves the

boarders open, the extreme right wing parties will continually gain support, where if she

chooses to close the boards, like many European countries are choosing to do, she will

be indirectly admitting that she made a mistake.

Dublin Regulation

The Dublin Regulationdetermines which nation isresponsible to process an

application for asylum seekers seeking international protection under the Geneva

Convention and EU Qualification Directive of the European Union8. The major

importance of this regulation is so that in the future the country of which a migrant or

refugee enters first is required to the one who deals with the asylum claim. This will

hopefully help migrants from being stuck between two countries with conflicting claim

policies. The way this regulation would work in practice, is if a migrant gets checked for

where they were initially registered the authorities of that country canmake a transfer

request to the migrant’s initial entry country. If the claim in accurate, the entry country

would be legally bound to take back the migrant8.

The problem with the Dublin Regulation was that when the migration crisis hit,

the system became overwhelmed because when the regulation was put in place it was

never expecting such large numbers. To make matters worse the attitude towards the

regulation was not forceful as the Italian and Greek authorities had little desire to make

8 http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/d08dc262-bed1-11e5-9fdb-87b8d15baec2.html#axzz46qITQm3K

5

migrants register. The fact that migrants knew that registering could restrict them going

to more favorable countries, many did not do so.

The United Kingdom seems most in favour of the of the Dublin regulation. The

guidelines of the regulation have allowed the United Kingdom to deport over 12,000

asylum seekers to other member countries in the European Union8.A step towards

reconfiguring this policy seems that it will benefit the European Union by creating a

federal asylum policy. However, as with every new or changed regulation in the

European Union this will be difficult for all countries to accept and will likely be very

controversial down the road.

The European Union Turkey Deal

In 2014 over 276,00 illegalrefugeesentered the European Union which accounts

for a 138% increase from 2013.9This has proven difficult for Europe but especially

Germany due to the open boarder policy. It has been reported that many of the refugee

camps can no longer cope with the influx of refugees. With this shortage of

accommodation many refugees have to find other ways to live, causing many of them to

turn to the streets. The German police have been cautious of this, however with

numbers rising everyday it has caused many of the aforementioned problems from

crime to political instability.

From the chart to the right, it

shows the most asylum applications

were directed towards Germany, with

9 http://www.zeit.de/politik/ausland/2015-01/europaeische-union-illegale-einwanderung

6

nearly 500,000 applications in 2015.10 The difficulties with this is although such a high

number are seeking asylum, over a million people have been accounted for entering

Germany in 2015. This further shows the importance of controlling the crisis as it

worries the European Union about how many illegal immigrants are taking advantage of

the ongoing crisis.

With the amount of illegal refugees that have taken advantage of this crisis,

recently a deal was struck between the European Union and Turkey, that many are

calling the European Union turkey deal.The idea of the deal is basically to send all

irregular migrants to Turkey.11 This deal will be focusing on primarily the irregular

migrants taking shelter on the Greek islands.Recently German Chancellor Angela

Merkel visited a migrant camp on the Turkish-Syrian border. The goal of the deal was to

deter migrants, mainly Syrians and Iraqis, from making illegal crossings between Turkey

and Greece.12 Others argue that Turkey is not a safe place to return people to and that it

is only a minor deterrent to a major problem. However, according to the European

Commission the deal has already reduced sharply the number of arrivals, from more

than 56,000 in February to around 7,800 over the past 30 days11. As of now, it has been

reported that 376 people have died on the Turkey Greece route. With a surprising

amount of children coming to Greece, with 37% of arrivals in Greece being children12.

The reason for this is because many Syrian and Iraqi families have sent their children,

primarily males who have fled the middle east in hopes to gain sold financial stability

somewhere in the European Union and then work on getting their family to come over.

10 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-3413191111 http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-eu-3584818112 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36121083

7

The European Union as a whole

Tensions in the European Union have been rising with countries choosing to take

different actions towards their migration policy. These tensions are especially rising in

areas where countries have begun to take action by closing their boarders. Especially in

areas like Turkey and Greece, where thousands of migrants and refugees continue to

arrive every day. New barriers have begun to take place. The European Union currently

seems split over how to handle the crisis. It is important they make a decision before

more migrants began to arrive with the improvement of weather and the increasing

attacks of terrorism in the Middle East.

Greece and Italy, especially

have been heavily criticized for

allowing people to cross their territory

unregistered.13 Most migrants want to

reach Germany or other countries in

northern Europe, although a surge of

unregistered migrants is proving

difficult for the European Union and

thus have been causing said tensions.

However, the identification process of

migrants has improved. In Greece, the

number whose fingerprints were included in a database rose from 8% in September to

78% in January 2106. In Italy, the corresponding rise was from 36% to 87%13.

13 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35714715

8

Greece is overwhelmed by the surge in migrants, and demands that the burden

be shared more equally among its European Union partners13. This is a major contrast

in comparison to Poland, who has said they will not take any refugees after the Brussels

attack. They originally agreed that they would take 7000 refugees, however after this

attack the minister has declared it is no longer prepared to take the agreed amount of

refugees.14 This has caused outrage for many countries such as Greece.

According the European commission the co-operation between Western Balkan

countries has been insufficient as boarder closers or restrictions between countries has

created a domino effect for countries in that region. As seen from the map to the above,

countries such as Bulgaria and Macedonia has either created restrictions or boarders

where fences have been introduced. This is shown by the red marking around the

boarders. Many have blamed Hungary for this domino effect because as of last year

they fenced off their southern boards as inferred in the map. This crisis, along with

countries actions has threatened the European Union’s Schengen area, which allows

for passport free travel for European Union citizens. Many countries outside of the

European Union have turned a blind eye to the crisis. For example, Macedonia has

been letting only very few Syrian and Iraqi refugees through, keeping other migrants

out14.

The Cost of the Crisis

The European Unionhas announced 10.1 billion euros to address the crisis and

help the most affected countries14. Greece has been given the most money with 148

14 http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/03/poland-refuses-accept-refugees-brussels-attack-160323132500564.html

9

million euros donated by the commission to aid the crisis. The majority of this money

(80 million euros) will go towards building reception compactly to house migrants and

refugees. Moreover, Africa and Syria would receive €2.3bn and €1bn would be

allocated to facilities for refugees in Turkey14. The money allocated to Turkey is given to

allow the country to cope with the refugee influx and allow them to welcome more

refugees. Many skeptics at this point believe Turkey is using this situation as bargaining

leverage, hoping to get more money and aid from Europe.

Dangers of Migration Journey

Many underestimate the dangers migrants face taking part of the migration crisis.

In 2015 alone the reported deaths in the Mediterranean was 3,770 in 2015. Although

this cumber is small compared to the millions of migrants currently fleeing, on the less it

is still significant for in the Mediterranean alone. Moreover, around the world, over 5,400

migrants lost their lives in 2015.15 This as well is an underestimation as many deaths

are still not accounted for.

As is shown from the

chart to the right, in the past

three years there has not been

a reduction in migrant deaths.

The deaths occurred mostly

from North Africa to Italy and

more than 800 died from the

15 http://missingmigrants.iom.int/latest-global-figures

10

crossing from Turkey to Greece in the Aegean.10In 2015 the most deaths occurred

during April when a boat full of roughly 800 migrants capsized.10 The capsize occurred

off the sea of Libya and although reports are mixed, most agree that overcrowding of

the boat was contributor. The unfortunate parts of this death toll is that in the coming

summer months, when the migration will be the busiest the deaths of migrants is likely

to increase again.

History of Swedish Migration

As the third-largest country by land area in the European Union and a total

population of over 9.8 million inhabitants, Sweden has historically always had a low

population density of 21 inhabitants per square kilometer16. Despite that fact, Sweden

has experienced various periods of immigration influxes largely due to war and refugees

seeking a safe haven.

Sweden first became a major country of immigration when World War II started.

From 1938 to 1948, Jewish immigrants from Nazi Germany looked to Sweden for

asylum. Some were accepted but the majority were rejected because of the anti-

Semitism and discriminatory racial ideologies prevalent in Sweden at the time. One of

the biggest reasons for this rejection of Jewish refugees was that the Swedish

government wanted to avoid conflict with Nazi Germany. In addition to the Jewish

refugees, Sweden was also the destination for those fleeing from Finland, Estonia,

Latvia, Denmark, and Norway. Although there was a lot of concern and reluctance at

16https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweden

11

first to accept these foreigners, that feeling eventually subsided and these new

immigrants were accepted and welcomed to the Swedish community.17

With labour high in demand, Sweden experienced a huge increase of immigrants

from Germany, Italy, Greece, the former Yugoslavia, Turkey, and other Nordic, Baltic,

and Balkan countries from 1949 to 1971. Many of these immigrants came to Sweden

looking for job opportunities after World War II had ended. Because of this flood of post-

war immigrants, Sweden was faced with a housing shortage in the 1950s.

As a result,

the government of

Sweden developed

and implemented

the Million

Programme

initiative to build

100000 flats every

year between 1965 and 1974.18 In addition to this housing initiative, the Swedish

government also worked closely with the Swedish trade union confederation to allow

foreign workers to enjoy the same wage levels, rights, and benefits as native Swedes

while also officially regulating the process for workers requiring them to show proof of

employment offers, financial support, and housing arrangements18.

17http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/sweden-restrictive-immigration-policy-and-multiculturalism18https://sweden.se/migration/

12

From 1972 to 1999, asylum seekers from developing countries and their family

members became the third wave of Swedish immigration. Prior to this, Sweden became

a signatory during the 1951 UN Convention which discussed the status of refugees

escaping from countries under Soviet rule. This resulted in an influx of immigrants from

Hungary and the Czech Republic18. During this period, Sweden was also the destination

of refugees from many war torn countries such as Chile during Augusto Pincohet’s

dictatorship, Iraq during the Iran-Iraq War, and former Yugoslavia during the Ethnic

cleansing wars in the Balkan region17.

The Swedish Current Migration Policies

When Sweden joined the European Union in 1995 and officially became a party

in the Schengen agreement in 2001, Sweden opened the doors for both European

Union citizens and those from countries outside of the European Union. At this point,

Sweden became a key destination and recipient country for immigration. Sweden

allowed those to migrate to their country for reasons such as to be closer to family, to

seek asylum, look for work opportunities, or to study17. Specifically, the age limit for

family reunification was lowered to allow children under the age of 18 to apply for

immigration. In addition, the Act on Swedish Citizenship was introduced in 2001 that

allows someone to keep their old citizenship when applying to become a Swedish

citizen19. In 2004, Sweden was the one of three existing Member States that allowed

citizens from the eight new Eastern European Member States to work without

requesting a permit.

1919http://www.migrationsverket.se/English/About-the-Migration-Agency/Facts-and-statistics-/Facts-on-migration/History.html

13

Over time, Sweden slowly began to introduce legislations in order to fully control

the flow of migrants. With acts being introduced in 2005 and 2006, Sweden allowed

those who had been refused entry a chance to have their case reassessed as well as

making the effort to accommodate unaccompanied minors seeking asylum. Now in the

past few years, Sweden is still a key destination for refugees seeking safety. In 2014,

Sweden received over 80000 asylum seekers with the largest groups being Syrians,

Eritreans, and people without a state or country17. This marks the second highest level

number of migrants seeking applications since the 1992 wave of refugees from former

Yugoslavia.

As a

result, Sweden

introduced

temporary

border controls

on November

12th, 2015 to

reduce the

number of asylum seekers. By the end of the year, the total 20number of people applying

for asylum in Sweden had grown to 162,877 people19. Most recently, Sweden

introduced temporary identity checks on January 4th, 2016 to help reduce the number of

asylum seekers coming to Sweden. With this huge increase of migrants from war torn

2020http://www.worldbulletin.net/?aType=haber&ArticleID=119595

14

countries comes problems with housing these new immigrants and integrating them into

Sweden’s society.

Sweden’s Government and Citizens Attitudes on Migration

Sweden did not have an official policy for incorporating migrants into mainstream

society until 1975. In this year, the Swedish government endorsed a policy to deal with

labour migrants from the south of Europe. Immigrants were able to enjoy the same

rights as Swedish citizens, access to the welfare system, and decide if they wanted to

assimilate or maintain their distinct native culture. However, this program was never a

success. Instead it generated social welfare dependency with refugees because they

were allocated to areas of the country with few available jobs and high rates of

unemployment. As the number of refugees increased, the Swedish government had

difficulties finding municipalities that would accept more than what they had already

taken18. Despite this, Sweden generally remains very generous with their migration

policies as it greatly differs from other Nordic countries. This is due to the fact that

Sweden experienced positive aspects of migration in the past as well as a dominant

Social democratic government that is tolerant of migrants20. However, with the most

recent refugee crisis growing, Sweden again faces an issue of being overwhelmed by

migrants.

15

Effects of the Migration Crisis on Sweden

Sweden has always

prided itself on giving a warm

welcome to outsiders but with

the developing refugee crisis,

Sweden and its main political

parties have no idea how to

respond. Current policies are

clearly failing and at the

moment, there is no back-up

plan. Sweden now appears to be a country that is coming apart. In October 2015, an

asylum centre in the town of Munkedal was set alight in a series of arson attacks

against refugees. In response, the Swedish Migration Agency issued a statement

saying that locations of asylum centres will now be classified information22. Looking at

Swedish politics, the Sweden Democrats, a party known by the Swedish media as “neo-

fascist” is leading national opinion polls with their anti-immigration agendas rooted in

21neo-Nazi movements23. These issues stem from Sweden’s generous migration policy

that did not change despite the migration situation changing.

2121http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/sweden/11960921/Sweden-conceals-refugee-centre-addresses-after-attacks.html22http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/sweden/11960921/Sweden-conceals-refugee-centre-addresses-after-attacks.html23http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/sweden/11814498/Anti-immigrant-Sweden-Democrats-now-the-biggest-party-according-to-poll.html24http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/sweden/11992479/How-Sweden-the-most-open-country-in-the-world-was-overwhelmed-by-migrants.html

16

In contrast, David Cameron’s election victory in Britain was being discussed in

great detail at the time. Ideas such as stopping migrants from claiming benefits for four

years and pulling out of the European Union were being discussed. This came as a

shock to many as Britain had always been known as a globally minded nation. However

the explanation is that Britain is a country that is unsure about immigrant but loves

immigrants while Sweden is a country that is sure about immigrant but does not love

immigrants. In Britain, Britons are concerned about border controls but do not hesitate

to hire immigrants if available where as in Sweden, immigrants are twice as likely to be

unemployed than natives, one of the worst ratios for a developed country. The inability

to integrate immigrants when accepting them at such a high level is a recipe for a

political and national identity crisis24.

Since the end of 2015, the Swedish government has tightened border controls to

make it harder to enter without a valid passport or identification document. Much of

these policy changes are partly due to many of the other European Countries failing to

receive their agreed share of refugees. Sweden’s prime minister, Stefan Lofven stated

that refugees would receive only temporary residence permits from April so that more

people choose to seek asylum in other countries. This increase in refugees have

created a frantic scramble for the government to provide shelter for those arriving into

the country. Many refugees arriving were forced to sleep on the streets because no free

bed could be found. With many conflicting opinions in Sweden’s political landscape,

Sweden was described as “a light in the darkness this autumn…but today the light was

extinguished” with implementation of the new asylum policies. Since the implementation

17

of the border control measures, average number of asylum seekers have fallen from

1507 asylum seekers to 1222 per day25.

Britain’s Debate on Leaving the European Union (Brexit)Amidst the migration crisis, one of the most controversial issues is how David

Cameron is demanding for minor changes in Britain’s relationship with the European

Union. With many opinions on both sides of issue, a Brexit could potentially deal a

major blow to the EU and be a huge turning point along the European Union’s road to

collapse. Those who support the Brexit claim that Europe is heading towards becoming

a federal state where those who oppose the Brexit argue that the strength in the

European Union comes from the co-operation between nations, protection of human

rights, and promotion of free trade. Many believe that it is imperative that Britain is a full

participant in the migrant crisis debate. In the scenario that the European Union

collapses, the UK government that helped add to this problem will be seen as the

scapegoat as opposed to the architect. Britain should not isolate itself from the troubles

of Europe as much of its own power comes from the strength of the European Union26.

Britain is set to hold the UK referendum this summer where it is expected for the EU to

be at the height of the migration crisis. Poland’s former prime minister, Leszek

Balcerowicz describes Britain’s plan for a four-year ban on benefits as going against the

European Union’s fundamental principles. Leszek states that Britain would “set in

motion a destructive spiral” while France’s former Europe minister Noelle Lenoir states

that “it would be the first time in Europe’s history that the free market principles are put

in danger”27. With the state of the European Union in question, this decision could be

the tipping point for the future of the EU project.

18

Conclusions and Overall Problems Moving ForwardAs many people fear, the pressure for Europe to solve the migration crisis could

tear the European Union apart. Berlin and Brussels are pushing for major overhaul of

European asylum policies with bitter battles taking place between national governments.

A European Union ambassador is quoted saying “The system does not work anymore.

It was not designed for what we have right now, hundreds of thousands of refugees”28.

One of the big issues is that other countries in the EU are not taking their fair share of

refugees as 90% of asylum seekers ended up in either Germany, Sweden, or Austria.

Germany and its officials state that this migration crisis it eh biggest issue since the

reunification in 1990; Sweden, a country that has historically been the most generous in

Europe on asylum has introduced stringent border controls; and Austria stated in

January 2016 that it is suspending the Schengen agreement28.

At the moment, current developments do not paint a positive picture for the

European Union. Eastern Europeans are rejecting all notions of importing Western

European multiculturalism to their societies; Slovenia has rejected German and Austria

police support that shows a resistance for cooperation between countries; and the pact

with Turkey and Greece has not delivered results while the EU governments are still

trying to find a way to fund the 3 billion euro bill. With no clear solution in sight and

other issues ongoing in addition to the migrant crisis, there is no guarantee for what

happens next for the European Union.22

2226http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8ba35856-c8d1-11e5-be0b-b7ece4e953a0.html#axzz470gttbUy27http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jan/25/holding-eu-vote-during-migration-crisis-terrible-uk-told-enrico-letta28http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/20/pressure-to-resolve-migration-crisis-could-tear-eu-apart

19

Works Cited

Bachega, H. (2016, March 3). Migrant crisis: Have EU promises been kept? Retrieved April 25, 2016, from http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35714715

Brexit is no way out of a Europe in crisis - FT.com. (n.d.). Retrieved April 27, 2016, from http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8ba35856-c8d1-11e5-be0b-b7ece4e953a0.html#axzz470gttbUy

Crouch, D. (2015). Sweden slams shut its open-door policy towards refugees. Retrieved April 27, 2016, from http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/24/sweden-asylum-seekers-refugees-policy-reversal

EU member countries. (n.d.). Retrieved April 25, 2016, from http://europa.eu/about-eu/countries/member-countries/

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law. (n.d.). Retrieved April 25, 2016, from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=URISERV:l33500

Flüchtlinge: Immer mehr Asylanträge in Deutschland. (2015, January 14). Retrieved April 25, 2016, from http://www.zeit.de/politik/ausland/2015-01/europaeische-union-illegale-einwanderung

Hitlers letzte Opfer. (2011, January 25). Retrieved April 25, 2016, from http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/spiegelgeschichte/d-76574305.html

Frankfurter Rundschau. (n.d.). Retrieved April 25, 2016, from http://www.fr-online.de/pegida,29337826,29350760.html

History. (n.d.). Retrieved April 27, 2016, from http://www.migrationsverket.se/English/About-the-Migration-Agency/Facts-and-statistics-/Facts-on-migration/History.html

Malmo, R. O. (n.d.). Sweden conceals refugee centre addresses after attacks. Retrieved April 27, 2016, from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/sweden/11960921/Sweden-conceals-refugee-centre-addresses-after-attacks.html

Migrant crisis: EU-Turkey deal is 'working' (2016, April 24). Retrieved April 25, 2016, from http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36121083

Migrant crisis: Migration to Europe explained in seven charts - BBC News. (2016, March 4). Retrieved April 25, 2016, from http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34131911

Missing Migrants Project. (n.d.). Retrieved April 25, 2016, from http://missingmigrants.iom.int/latest-global-figures

Morris, C. (2016, March 18). EU-Turkey migrant deal: A Herculean task. Retrieved April 25, 2016, from http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-eu-35848181

Orange, R. (n.d.). Anti-immigrant Sweden Democrats now the biggest party, according to poll. Retrieved April 27, 2016, from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/sweden/11814498/Anti-immigrant-Sweden-Democrats-now-the-biggest-party-according-to-poll.html

Poland refuses to accept refugees after Brussels attack. (2016, March 23). Retrieved April 25, 2016, from http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/03/poland-refuses-accept-refugees-brussels-attack-160323132500564.html

20

Robinson, D. (2016, January 20). How the EU plans to overhaul ‘Dublin regulation’ on asylum claims - FT.com. Retrieved April 25, 2016, from http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/d08dc262-bed1-11e5-9fdb-87b8d15baec2.html#axzz46qITQm3K

Somaskanda, S. (n.d.). In Germany, Immigrants Bristle at a New Generation. Retrieved March 8, 2016, from http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/03/08/germans-older-immigrant-communities-dont-like-the-new-kids-in-town-refugees-syrians-iraqis-turks/

Sweden. (n.d.). Retrieved April 27, 2016, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sweden

Sweden: Restrictive Immigration Policy and Multiculturalism. (2006). Retrieved April 27, 2016, from http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/sweden-restrictive-immigration-policy-and-multiculturalism

Top 25 Destination Countries for Global Migrants over Time. (2013). Retrieved April 25, 2016, from http://www.migrationpolicy.org/programs/data-hub/charts/top-25-destination-countries-global-migrants-over-time

Traynor, I. (2016). Pressure to resolve migration crisis could tear EU apart. Retrieved April 27, 2016, from http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/20/pressure-to-resolve-migration-crisis-could-tear-eu-apart

Webb, A. (2015, May 20). Germany Top Migration Land After U.S. in New OECD Ranking. Retrieved April 25, 2016, from http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-05-20/immigration-boom-propels-germany-past-u-k-in-new-oecd-ranking

How Sweden, the most open country in the world, was overwhelmed by migrants. (n.d.). Retrieved April 27, 2016, from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/sweden/11992479/How-Sweden-the-most-open-country-in-the-world-was-overwhelmed-by-migrants.html

Wintour, P. (2016). Holding EU vote during migration crisis would be terrible, UK told. Retrieved April 27, 2016, from http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jan/25/holding-eu-vote-during-migration-crisis-terrible-uk-told-enrico-letta

Worldbulletin News. (n.d.). Retrieved April 27, 2016, from http://www.worldbulletin.net/?aType=haber

21

We give professor Ewa Latoszek our permission to publish our essay and the presentation at the website of the Jean Monnet Chair directed by professor Ewa Latoszek 

22